Trying Vanilla pup; issues

[dimkr]

But I feel there is one important program missing in the ISO itself, and that is GParted. Very often needed to install a Puppy to disk.

gparted is apt install gparted away

[bert07]

Just installed it on my HP Laptop 17-cp0xxx using Lick.
All works fine. With several Puppy's I didn't get no sound on this computer. With Vanilla Dpup that issue is solved.

P.S.: I did install Gparted ones installed with the Synaptic Package Manager.

I truely believe this might be the Puppy for the future; but than again: I am used to Debian.

Again: thank you very much for Vanilla Dpup!

[bert07]

Installed SMPlayer using PPM; Installed VLC using Synaptic Package Manager.
Everything installed and works as expected.

BTW: The Vanilla Dpup boots like a charm!

[dimkr]

Everything installed and works as expected.

If you find problems later, don't be shy! If they're easy and safe to fix, they will be solved in a future weekly build.

[bert07]

Frugal install of VanillaDPup64 - 9.2.16 (with a save folder).
No media player is installed, so I installed VLC.
When the installation was finished (took a long time) the complete system crashed. Nothing worked anymore.
The only way to get out of Vanilla was to hold the power button.
And afterwords on reboot, Vanilla wouldn't startup anymore (kernel panic).

This does not only happen in the VanillaDpup64, but also on the latest (official) Slacko64, Impishpup64 and (if I remember correctly) at least on one of the latter JammyPup32's.

I do not know if VLC is to blame because I often install more than 1 program at the same session.
I did notice in the console that VLC alters something in the kernel, or tries to alter something.

I can test this (installing one program at the time, and restarting with a clean working VanillaDPup before every install ) and with every crash send you the logfiles, if you just tell me which log-file(s) you need and where I can find them.

Regards...

[dimkr]

No media player is installed, so I installed VLC.

How did you install VLC?

As far as I know, apt install -y vlc (or via Synaptic) should be extremely quick and works perfectly. I wouldn't be surprised if PPM fails to install VLC or breaks the system.

[mikeslr]

Let me just add this to what dimkr wrote. He has gone out of the way to create Puppys which can use apt and synaptic. Puppy Package Manager should not be used at all for any application they can provide. They are great applications because they maintain a record of every file which was built in or added using them. But they will know nothing about any files placed on your system using Puppy Package Manager.

Because Puppy is not debian/Ubuntu it may have builtin and use some light-weight 'infra-structures' rather than that of its 'binary compatible'. apt/synaptic may not know one or more the libraries builtin to debian/ubuntu are missing. Before executing a Save start the application using the terminal and examine its binaries using ListDD, https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewto ... 260#p32260. Use apt/synaptic to install any missing libraries.

The only time Puppy Package Manager should be used is to obtain applications not available via apt/synaptic. Do not install them; well, at least not before you examine them to make certain that like ListDD they consist exclusively of scripts and will not install binaries or libraries. Any which do have binaries or libraries can safely be used, but only by packaging them as an SFS or AppImage. The technique is detailed here, viewtopic.php?p=40354#p40354. The same rule applies if pkg-cli, https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewto ... 4331#p4331 is used.

But I should have mentioned there that before creating an SFS the binaries should be examined with ListDD. Usually, if the application is entirely 'alien' --such as built against the qt4 framework no longer supported and available from Ubuntu and debian-- they can also safely be included in an adrv.sfs or ydrv.sfs.

[mikewalsh]

Hm.

While this may sound to some to be criticism - it's not intended as such - it does seem slightly odd to include two totally different package management systems, especially if they conflict with & break each other's installs.....?

I would have thought in this instance it would be preferable to only use Synaptic. While I personally can't stand the thing (and for that reason will in all likelihood never use Vanilla DPup; no offense, dimkr, that's just me!), many people who come to Puppy do so from more mainstream distros where they're used to and completely comfortable with Synaptic.

In such an instance, it would simply seem to be confusing the issue to include the PPM.

(I came to Puppy to get away from Synaptic, sudo, apt-get, etc. I found the whole shebang to be awkward and often downright annoying to use. While I don't deny the mainstream distros have done a fantastic job making Linux very user-friendly & accessible to the masses, they still insist on clinging to their command-line roots.

I may have used Linux for almost a decade.....but I still like my GUIs, I'm afraid. 30 some-odd years of Windoze will do that to you.)

Credit must, however, go to dimkr for creating a Puppy that will seem more "normal" and "natural" to existing Linux users, and will thus encourage them to hang around and explore the 'Puppy-sphere' for at least a little while. Nice one, mate.

Mike.

[dimkr]

While this may sound to some to be criticism - it's not intended as such - it does seem slightly odd to include two totally different package management systems, especially if they conflict with & break each other's installs.....?

I'm probably the biggest supporter of the "<= one application per task" motto here, you're preaching to the choir.

PPM is in very bad shape, and I've proposed replacing it with something else (pkg?) or at least, making it optional, so I can remove it from dpup. I've done so multiple times, and this topic has been discussed to death.

Right now, it seems that everybody who participates in this discussion (besides me) loves PPM and wants it to stay on the grounds that PPM is "tradition" and "unique", but nobody volunteers to fix and improve it, although it's pretty clear how dangerous and slow it is. The PPM supporters reject the idea of making PPM an optional component that's included by default, because they appreciate PPM's presence in any Puppy build, so I pushed https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE/pull/3325 into latest woof-CE: this minimal change makes PPM a .pet-only package manager if apt is present, so the two don't conflict, PPM can't destroy the system with its broken dependency handling, but users can still use old .pet packages if that's what they want. Users who don't use .pet packages can just ignore PPM, making everyone happy.

Vanilla Dpup 9.2.x receives only bug and security fixes, but no breaking changes, so I can't push this update to 9.2.x. But it's already included in 10.0.x development builds, and if I start a 9.3.x series, it will include this change too.

creating a Puppy that will seem more "normal" and "natural" to existing Linux users

Vanilla Dpup even has an empty sudo alias, so you can copy-paste sudo apt install ... lines from countless online tutorials and they will just work, although this is Puppy and not Debian. There are many ingredients in this magic recipe of a Debian-compatible Puppy

[Feek]

Since the beginning of my use of VanillaDpup, I have kept in mind dimkr's recommendation that additional software is good to install with apt or synaptic.
Everything I've installed this way works without a problem.
I don't really care what I use to install other apps, as long as it works reliably.

I haven't installed anything with PPM yet.
I only included a few .pet packages of typical "puppy" apps by downloading their latest version from the forum and left-clicking them in rox (pupsysinfo, trans-tray, pwidgets).
PPM allows me to uninstall them easily, so I'm glad it's included.

BTW, I was surprised VLC player starts as spot, so sometimes I have to copy the file to /home/spot or change permissions to be able to play it.
But this is of course due to the fact that VLC can be used for online activities.

[dimkr]

BTW, I was surprised VLC player starts as spot

Normally, VLC doesn't want to run as root. The fixmenusd daemon in Vanilla Dpup updates the menu when you install or remove an application, and auto-configures known-to-be-problematic applications (VLC and browsers, mostly) to run as spot.

[Feek]

BTW, I was surprised VLC player starts as spot

Normally, VLC doesn't want to run as root. The fixmenusd daemon in Vanilla Dpup updates the menu when you install or remove an application, and auto-configures known-to-be-problematic applications (VLC and browsers, mostly) to run as spot.

I have a question about online applications in the form of appimages that are not installed in the normal way.
Can they also be run as spot?

Sometimes I use Freetube appimage to play YT videos.
I only manage to run it as root with the --no-sandbox argument (as has been recommended several times here on the forum).
Thanks in advance.

[Sofiya]

BTW, I was surprised VLC player starts as spot, so sometimes I have to copy the file to /home/spot or change permissions to be able to play it.
But this is of course due to the fact that VLC can be used for online activities.

I'm running as root - enter in terminal:

Code: Select all

sed -i 's/geteuid/getppid/' /usr/bin/vlc

or so

Code: Select all

sed -i 's/geteuid/getppid/' /usr/bin/vlc.bin

now vlc should run as root

[mikewalsh]

@dimkr :-

Admittedly, it's becoming rare that I in fact use the PPM these days. I've become so convinced of the value of the line of 'portable' applications I've developed and put together - simple as their structure in fact is - that the last 4 Pups I've added to the kennels have been populated almost entirely with these anyway.

I know they're not to everybody's taste - nor is it the traditional 'Linux way' - but they work for me. The PPM occasionally gets used to install stuff like the 'mate-system-monitor', and things like that which I can't find elsewhere, but that's pretty much it.

Mike.

[Clarity]

What makes a PUPPY, again, this topic surfaces in the form of the recent comments, here?

One type of forum contribution: I am under the "impression" that its use of WoofCE to generate a running system is what makes a Puppy. In this case, "check" its a PUP.

Next, its up to the distro developer to "choose" what he will "allow" in HIS distro. I, personally, have always supported this position as these developers produce something they envision to be, both, functional and stable in use as one designs with the choices made. For me, "check" again.

Thus, the distro developer 'should' make the decision of what is envisioned as the distro which serves its design purpose and is functional for use.

Like @FATDOG, I support developer freedom: @dimkr. if YOU choose, design this distro to YOUR liking for user use. And, like FATDOG, if PPM is not what is best in your design, then decide!

Edit: corrections made,

[rockedge]

PPM should be retired as package manager. I could envision PPM used as a package browser and search tool only.

In KLV-Airedale I've experimented with just converting .pet to .deb to .xbps at first because I have those tools already and this has worked installing a .pet in KLV.

I should try a .pet to .xbps convertor and let the XBPS package manager do the installation.

Pkg-cli and Pkg2 I've also set up in KLV to work just enough that they could work with the Puppy repos and will install some simple PET packages but in the long run not practical enough to justify the effort it will take to get these to work. So I am looking more at package convertors to unify the package types to one package manager

[dimkr]

Admittedly, it's becoming rare that I in fact use the PPM these days.

Same here, haven't used it for years. I bet most users who learn how to use Synaptic or apt-get won't use PPM for .deb packages, if at all.

Can they also be run as spot?

Yes, either run-as-spot /path/to/something.AppImage or create a .desktop file with Exec=run-as-spot .... But you'll need to move the .AppImage to a directory spot can read from.

I support developer freedom

Ummm ... thank you for your support? I'm not sure how to reply to this declaration.

PPM should be retired as package manager. I could envision PPM used as a package browser and search tool only.

PPM suffers from many issues, but some of them are GUI issues (see https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... ssues/2186 for examples). I don't mind including pkg in my builds if 1) PPM's "backend" is dropped in favor of pkg, so PPM becomes a graphical shell for pkg 2) pkg has no GUI of its own and 3) somebody adopts what's left from PPM and starts fixing issues. For now, the smallest solution I have for the problem of backward compatibility with existing .pet packages is keeping PPM but with narrowed-down, .pet-only focus.

@bert07 Can you share the VLC package you used? Maybe I can add some safeguard to prevent installation of such packages.

[Feek]

Can they also be run as spot?

Yes, either run-as-spot /path/to/something.AppImage or create a .desktop file with Exec=run-as-spot .... But you'll need to move the .AppImage to a directory spot can read from.

I got this message but I have no idea how and where to set FUSE.

Code: Select all

~$ run-as-spot /home/spot/freetube.AppImage 
fusermount: mount failed: Operation not permitted

Cannot mount AppImage, please check your FUSE setup.
You might still be able to extract the contents of this AppImage 
if you run it with the --appimage-extract option. 
See https://github.com/AppImage/AppImageKit/wiki/FUSE 
for more information
open dir error: No such file or directory

[dimkr]

@Feek Currently, Puppy (in general) doesn't support unprivileged mounts. I'll see if I can find a secure solution that works for spot.

EDIT: @Feek, can you check if AppImages work after chmod 4755 /usr/bin/fusermount? If so, I'll push this fix into woof-CE and cherry-pick it into the next Vanilla Dpup 9.2.x build.

[mikewalsh]

@dimkr / @Feek :-

I discovered the issue with AppImages 'running-as-spot' quite a while back. All my 'portables' that are AppImage-based tend to run as root with the "--no-sandbox" switch, instead.

The only things I can think of are to either:-

• Change permissions for fusermount (& libfuser? Not sure about this) prior to launching an AppImage as spot, followed by changing them back again at close

• Or, giving spot its own dedicated copies of these items...

Just my two-penn'orth, FWIW. There's probably a neater solution to be had.

Mike.

[dimkr]

fusermount needs to be SUID root, that's the way it is in Debian and Ubuntu. In Puppy it's 755 (as opposed to, 4755). This is the root of the problem as far as I see, at least in this particular case.

[Feek]

EDIT: @Feek, can you check if AppImages work after chmod 4755 /usr/bin/fusermount? If so, I'll push this fix into woof-CE and cherry-pick it into the next Vanilla Dpup 9.2.x build.

@dimkr / @mikewalsh
Yes i can confirm i can run AppImages as spot after changing the permissions (verified in htop).
I tried it with Freetube and Audacity.

[mikewalsh]

@Feek :-

Nice one. I may modify some of the more commonly-used portables, to give users the option of running either as root OR spot, depending on their choice. It'll need a bit of thinking about, though.

Mike.

[bert07]

About VLC, I'm sorry I have been away so long but I had other issues that needed to be dealt with. I tried both synaptic and ppm; The result was the same.
I did notice afterwards that if I would have waited longer (30 min - 60 min) - the installation program finished okay and everything kept working.
This computer is a intel i3 and became rather slow. But 30 min or longer to install VLC seems a bit long whatever package manager you use. Maybe it is just my computer.
But Puppy's are supposed to run on older hardware, don't they?

But it's okay. I'll work it out.

[greengeek]

I am really not sure which is the best thread to be reporting issues but here goes:

Using VanillDpup 9.2.24 on a Toshiba Satellite S500 laptop I am finding that my hardware clock gets changed to an inappropriate setting after quicksetup is run.

I am not seeing this behaviour with other pups I am running or trialling.

Here is what I saw in my recent boot:

- My bios clock was set to match my current time 10:50AM (displayed in bios setup before proceeding to usb boot)
- Once VanillaDpup is booted (and quicksetup dialog waiting for me to decide timezone) I hover over the tray clock and it tells me that my time is 10:50AM GMT
- I choose my timezone (Pacific, Auckland) via quicksetup - and the tray clock changes to 23:54 NZDT

This is out of step with my local time (13 hours ahead of reality)

What am I doing wrong?

[Feek]

@greengeek
the issue of time difficulties in VanillaDpup has already been discussed here.

When you set the correct time zone and then connect to the Internet, your system should display the correct time (Connman synchronizes the time automatically with the time server by default).

If I understand correctly, you are setting the puppies to expect local time in the bios (compatible with Windows). I have had problems with this setup while booting various puppies/dogs. It is reported that this does not always work 100% on Linux. Since I hardly ever use Windows, I decided to set the puppies to expect UTC time in the bios. Since then I have had no problems with time.

[greengeek]

the issue of time difficulties in VanillaDpup has already been discussed here.

Many thanks - I will have a careful read of that.

If I understand correctly, you are setting the puppies to expect local time in the bios (compatible with Windows).

Yes, I guess so. It makes no sense to have BIOS set to anything other than local standard time. (Otherwise why have any BIOS clock at all?).

When you set the correct time zone and then connect to the Internet, your system should display the correct time (Connman synchronizes the time automatically with the time server by default).

Hmmm, not happening for me.

The behaviour I would expect is this:
- Puppy boots and looks at BIOS time to know what you have set manually.
- Puppy requests what is your timezone using Quicksetup.
- Puppy sets your system clock to your BIOS clock, and depending on date may add/subtract one hour to adjust for daylight saving time - depending on your timezone choice.
- Aditionally I would expect Puppy to ask if you want it to connect to an internet timeserver and a) set your software clock or b) set your BIOS clock.

I definitely feel it is unacceptable for a Puppy to change the BIOS setting without explicit user approval.

[greengeek]

Using VanillDpup 9.2.24 on a Toshiba Satellite S500 laptop I am finding that my hardware clock gets changed to an inappropriate setting after quicksetup is run.
I am not seeing this behaviour with other pups I am running or trialling.

My mistake - I did not see that Quicksetup in VanillaDpup sets the default as "Hardware clock set to UTC"

This is the opposite of the other pups I am running.

As long as I untick the "Hardware clock set to UTC" checkbox then the boot continues without messing up my BIOS RTC.

[wiak]

This is the opposite of the other pups I am running.

As long as I untick the "Hardware clock set to UTC" checkbox then the boot continues without messing up my BIOS RTC.

Seems most Pups follow mswindows lead by using local time in bios. Most other Linux prefer utc... Internet time syncing often used to resolve the inevitable mess

[greengeek]

Some of the software I wish to use is requesting libgconf-2.so.4
What is the best way to get the appropriate lib and where would it be best placed?

I tried the following:

Code: Select all

~s $apt install -y libgconf-2.so.4
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Reading state information... Done
E: Unable to locate package libgconf-2.so.4
E: Couldn't find any package by glob 'libgconf-2.so.4'
~$

Obviously a hole in my understanding. How do I get hold of libgconf-2.so.4 please?